Pentax macro HELP please - DPChallenge Forums

04/08/2007 11:28:40 AM · #1

This Sigma 105mm macro

or this Pentax 100mm macro

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR

04/08/2007 03:24:02 PM · #2

bump

RainMotorsports

Nikon D60

04/08/2007 03:25:36 PM · #3

I would talk to

Artyste or

Option there is a few others too those two i talk to about pentax's the most.

Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM

04/08/2007 04:59:31 PM · #4

This is a rhetorical question.. of course.

If you have the money, and can find it, the Pentax.

SteveJ

Canon EOS-7D

04/08/2007 05:10:33 PM · #5

I have invested a rather large...no, small amount and got some M42 lenses. Using a 2X converter and 50mm, or zoom lenses, I have macro to 1:1. I have a Kenko Macro converter and will be trying the setup now that the little bugs are about again.

option

Nikon D200

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D

04/08/2007 10:21:05 PM · #6

Do it now. Before the rebate expires. With the rebate the prices are basically the same, it's a no-brainer IMO.

They're also in stock right now...do it!

sir_bazz

Pentax K-5

Pentax FA 50mm f/1.4 AF

04/08/2007 11:07:43 PM · #7

Easy....only one of those lenses has "Pentax" written on it. :P

bazz.

RainMotorsports

Nikon D60

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR

04/08/2007 11:10:33 PM · #8

Originally posted by sir_bazz:

Easy....only one of those lenses has "Pentax" written on it. :P

bazz.

The purist!

Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

04/08/2007 11:20:59 PM · #9

I was wondering about the difference in size, the sigma being 58mm and the pentax being 49mm. I shoulda hav made that clear in my otriginal post. So i was wondering if the sigma was a superior lens.

jackal9

Canon EOS-50D

04/08/2007 11:24:34 PM · #10

Yep, Pentax all the way...

Marc923

04/08/2007 11:26:48 PM · #11

I'll chime in and say go with the Pentax. With the rebate, it's a fantastic deal.

04/08/2007 11:38:46 PM · #12

the consensus here is def. the pentax, but u still have'nt enlightened me on the difference in specs.

sir_bazz

Pentax K-5

Pentax FA 50mm f/1.4 AF

04/08/2007 11:39:49 PM · #13

Originally posted by dmadden:

I was wondering about the difference in size, the sigma being 58mm and the pentax being 49mm. I shoulda hav made that clear in my otriginal post. So i was wondering if the sigma was a superior lens.

All true macro lenses are good due to them being prime lenses. Front filter size has little bearing on quality for primes and as an example Photodo has the Canon 50mm f1.4, which uses a 58mm filter thread, with a lower MTF score than the Pentax 50mm f1.4 which uses a 49mm filter thread.

More important is the focal length as this determines minimum working distance at 1:1 magnification ratio. You'll get more working distance with a 100mm macro lens than a 50mm macro lens. Some people demand even more working distance and opt for the Sigma 150mm or 180mm lenses.

Most manufacturers also offer 200mm macro lenses but these aren't cheap compared to their shorter counterparts.

I suspect you'll see little measurable difference between the Pentax 100mm or the Sigma 105mm unless enlarging to poster size prints.

cheers,
bazz.

Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

04/08/2007 11:42:39 PM · #14

Originally posted by dmadden:

the consensus here is def. the pentax, but u still have'nt enlightened me on the difference in specs.

There probably aren't a lot of difference in Specs.

I've already pointed out to you that filter sizes don't make a difference in quality. So that shouldn't be a consideration, unless you own filters in a various size that you'd want to use.

Sigma has Quality Control issues.. you are likely to end up with a dud lens far more easily than with the Pentax.

Pentax' SMC coatings are legendary. Sigma does not have this.

Build quality goes to Pentax as well. The 100mm Macro is a very well-regarded lens. One of the finest built.

You've asked for opinions, and you've gotten them. You need to make a choice. We can't help you any further. Good luck.

jackal9

Canon EOS-50D

04/08/2007 11:55:14 PM · #15

Originally posted by Artyste:

Originally posted by dmadden:
the consensus here is def. the pentax, but u still have'nt enlightened me on the difference in specs.

There probably aren't a lot of difference in Specs.

I've already pointed out to you that filter sizes don't make a difference in quality. So that shouldn't be a consideration, unless you own filters in a various size that you'd want to use.

Sigma has Quality Control issues.. you are likely to end up with a dud lens far more easily than with the Pentax.

Pentax' SMC coatings are legendary. Sigma does not have this.

Build quality goes to Pentax as well. The 100mm Macro is a very well-regarded lens. One of the finest built.

You've asked for opinions, and you've gotten them. You need to make a choice. We can't help you any further. Good luck.

Pentax SMC optics are generally regarded as some of the best in the world, you can't argue with worldclass quality. I have used pentax optics for 30 years, I have a 50mm f1.7 lens I wouldn't trade for love or money, lol. It's that good...

04/08/2007 11:58:38 PM · #16

Originally posted by Artyste:

:)Thanks a lot, that helps me a great great deal.
And so did Sir baz.

I also think i'll need the distance for lighting and stuff, so it'll have to be the pentax 100mm.

On another note, that pentax f4 60-250mm. proposed for end of 2007. Anyone hav any idea on price range???

04/08/2007 11:59:35 PM · #17

Originally posted by dmadden:

On another note, that pentax f4 60-250mm. proposed for end of 2007. Anyone hav any idea on price range???

Given the prices on the 16-50 and 50-135mm, I'd say you're looking at $1000 - $1300 U.S.

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D

04/09/2007 12:18:45 AM · #18

Originally posted by Artyste:

Originally posted by dmadden:

On another note, that pentax f4 60-250mm. proposed for end of 2007. Anyone hav any idea on price range???

Given the prices on the 16-50 and 50-135mm, I'd say you're looking at $1000 - $1300 U.S.

Yikes! looks like i hafto ditch my girlfriend this christmas :)

option

Nikon D200

04/09/2007 12:24:50 AM · #19

Originally posted by Artyste:

You think so? Maybe MSRP, but I would be shocked to see the street price above 1000 US. Adorama has the 16-50 at 750 and the 50-135 at 830, if those are any indication, I'd say sub-1000 is a safe bet.

May just be wishful thinking, though...

04/09/2007 12:28:13 AM · #20

Originally posted by option:

Originally posted by Artyste:

Originally posted by dmadden:

On another note, that pentax f4 60-250mm. proposed for end of 2007. Anyone hav any idea on price range???

Given the prices on the 16-50 and 50-135mm, I'd say you're looking at $1000 - $1300 U.S.

You think so? Maybe MSRP, but I would be shocked to see the street price above 1000 US. Adorama has the 16-50 at 750 and the 50-135 at 830, if those are any indication, I'd say sub-1000 is a safe bet.

May just be wishful thinking, though...

Oh.. heck, you're right. I was thinking in terms of Canadian dollars for some reason.. $999.99 cdn and $1299.99 cdn for the 16-50 and 50-135.

So.. yah, my mistake. I'd expect around $850 - $950 U.S. then.

Man, it must be later than I thought.

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D

04/09/2007 12:28:52 AM · #21

Originally posted by option:

I hope so. Be ashamed to hav to let her go heheh

option

Nikon D200

04/09/2007 12:32:40 AM · #22

1299 for the 50-135 is ridiculous.

At the current exchange rate, they should be priced at 865 and 960. I hope those prices come down some more before the lenses are released...